Ronin

BTW, to your point, that's how pressure in sports works, it almost always starts with the blatantly obvious and with the most superficial indicators. That's not to say that there aren't good underlying causes that there's often evidence for prior to that point in time, but fans and particularly media who "have to say something" to fill airtime are very reactive, not very proactive or patient for reasons why. Having said that, I didn't care for McBeane's hire to begin with as both were OJT candidates in these roles with only average prior performance at best in McD's case, Beane being all but entirely unknown. I simply don't see any signs of their progress. Whatever they've done to whatever extent it's occurred, has largely been on the backs of the players that have been here prior to their arrival. I mean look at all the lengthy list of free agents that they've brought in, the ones that have worked out best have largely been risk-free players on low-end contracts. With the exception of Micah Hyde and this year's crop of free-agents which we don't have the returns yet, the pricey FAs have been Lotulolei and Murphy. Kroft is next but he's this year's. Poyer's next at a relatively inexpensive (read low-risk) contract averaging $3/season. Except for Hyde, the other most expensive FAs brought on either haven't met expectations or have significant injury risk attached to them. I don't see that as a good long-term building plan by someone that understands how to go about it. I haven't seen any other team built like that while whiffing on their major draft picks like we have.

Could be, using PFF's ratings, our new and improved OL-men aren't much better in pass protection than last year's OL-men, albeit better but only slightly more so in run-blocking. The thing is that we were horrific last year in running the ball, I'm not so confident that wasn't due to a diminished Shady, but if we go on pop-narrative here the reason was because our OL sucked at run blocking too, which of course was a big part of Allen's passing woes. But let's assume that's the case, not sure that still only slightly above-average run-blocking OL-men are going to make that magnitude of a difference. I see Singletary being a factor in the passing (receiving) game but not much in the rushing game. Too many guys like him have come and gone w/o the results as such. He simply doesn't have the speed to much more than an UTM RB but he lacks the size and power to be even average at that. He was a 3rd-rounder, so if he turns into a 500-receiving yard role player it won't have been a bad pick although I'd have made another. I don't know why our staff is so enamored with these small-school players, more than any Bills FO in modern history. I don't see them switching to Barkley, not after that Peterman debacle, and not as a starter anyway. It would understandably call heavily into question McD's competence as such. Allen has no excuse and needs the starting reps, he's simply going to have to play all season barring injury. I can see them yanking Allen so that "he doesn't lose confidence" if he's struggling in a game once, possibly twice, of under the premise that they don't want him to get hurt. If they start Barkley that won't be a good sign for many reasons. First, Barkley's a known quanity. The fact that he posted our best passing game all but literally stepping off of a sofa raises questions as to how horrible our OL really was IMO. But he's not going to play like that for a string of games. After all, that Jet D was horrible. I see Singletary being a factor in the passing (receiving) game but not much in the rushing game. Too many guys like him have come and gone w/o the results as such. He simply doesn't have the speed to much more than an UTM RB but he lacks the size and power to be even average at that. He was a 3rd-rounder, so if he turns into a 500-receiving yard role player it won't have been a bad pick although I'd have made another. He strikes me as a RB that's going to struggle big-time running the ball in the NFL. How Knox plays, if he's even healthy, will be more important. That's how I see it.

I hear ya, but I have to ask, how much of our passing D was predicated upon the notion that our rushing D was very average? (ranked 16th in rushing yards allowed and in a 3-way tie for 25th in rushing TDs allowed) Difficult to say w/o an extended analysis. Of our 6 games with the most rushing yards allowed though we lost 5 of the 6. In those 5 losses we were outscored by an average of 32-8. No reason for opponents to pass the ball although several teams did effectively anyway in those losses. I thought that last season was on of our least consistent ever. Inconsistency is a sign of poor coaching. Good coaching will consistently get whatever can be gotten out of a team, win or lose. We were all over the map on D. The one area where there was consistency was in our losses. Of the 11 games in which we allowed 20+ points we were 1-10. When we allowed 17 or fewer, which were all against teams with below average scoring offenses, we were 5-0. One of those games was with Barkley at QB, our best QB'd game all season. Average margin of defeat in those games was 18.7, which facilitates a diminished need to throw the ball for opponents.

Yeah, I can see the possibility for confusion there, I should have stated that better. I'll edit it. My "slim-to-nil" odds were of the team looking better or improving if as your assumption happens, namely that Allen busts. If Allen busts I really don't envision any scenario where the team overall improves to such an extent that McD deflects heat calling for his firing. The offense including all the newbies won't be helping him at that point, which will leave only improvements to the D. But Kyle's gone, Lorax is in his last season, Hughes is aging, none of them are his players and there isn't much after them that he brought on in the front-7 much less the DL. Even if Oliver turns into the beast that many insist he'll become, which as you know I don't see, then how much that improves the D with essentially Oliver replacing Kyle remains to be seen, but it's a reach to suggest that it'll be enough to offset the incompetence on the offensive side. That's how I see it anyway. Also, we have to start looking forward at that point. I'm simply not seeing what McBeane have done here. Lorax is in his last season, Shady will be fortunate to post a good season and is on his last legs too. Hughes is no spring chicken either. They were all here when he got here but he hasn't backfilled to their levels. Gore ain't long for the team. Who are the ringers that McBeane have brought on? I like Edmunds and the secondary, but short of those I don't see any pending the development of the rookies. How would you see the team improving?

And the skies will open up and rain gold doubloons at all home games for 15 minutes at halftime.

Yeah, the defense was not the core problem. I'm not happy with McBeane's "team building" there, but still, had we had an above-average offense and, for example, Shady with one more great season in him, I think we could have gone 10 wins. I'm not sure however that while the D didn't do the O any favors, that it also didn't factor into the play of the O much at all. I mean in the Red Zone it really doesn't matter what the O did anywhere else and we were 30th there. As I pointed out elsewhere, not sure you caught it, but we ranked 5th in fewest plays allowed and perfectly average in Time-of-Possession. So the D wasn't on the field for more plays or more time than the average team, and in terms of plays, it was on the field less than 27 other teams. I think he was trying to be facetious.

Correct, for those analyzing things through a straw. Hence the difference between a bona fide analyst and these talking wooden-heads proliferating the national media claiming to have a clue.

Well, OK, everyone sees things differently. But allow me to comment on that bolded part, which appears to be a heavy narrative here. To start, the meat of that "improvement" whether it's over the last four, six, whatever, is that single Miami game. I'm not sure that it's wise to put so much credence into a single game like that when the body-of-work otherwise is diametric to it. Allow me to sum up. If we extrapolate his last four games over the course of a 16-game season, i.e., multiply by 4, we get: 272 for 516 (52.7%), 3,404 Yards, 20 TDs, 20 INTs, 6.6 YPA, 5.6 Adj. YPA I suppose one can argue that it's respectable for a rookie that came in with Allen's risks apart from those 20 INTs and low YPAs given his "arm strength," but at least it's not horrific. I don't think that there's been a QB for us that's played that poorly in passing in a long time. But here's the thing, here is the season equivalent of the first three of those four games you cite as improvement; 272 for 549 (49.5%), 3,342 Yards, 11 TDs, 21 INTs, a 59.0 rating, 6.1 YPA, 4.7 Adj. YPA His Miami game stats extrapolated over 16 games are; 272 for 416 (65.4%), 3,584 Yards, 48 TDs, 16 INTs, a 114.9 rating, 8.6 YPA, 9.2 Adj. YPA So yes, while the "last 4," or "last 6" were in fact technically an improvement over his first six games, I'm not sure that they warrant the confidence that they've created here and elsewhere. His first 6 games were horrid and easily tracking for DFL in the entire league even lagging Rosen at the time. Those Miami stats obviously skew the last 4 or last 6 heavily, it's simply that people close their eyes to that. I mean there's no way around 11 TDs and 21 INTs, there simply isn't and it's probably not wise to use a single game like that to generate such grandiose expectations. Anyone can do it, but if we go and look up all the past QBs that have busted, we can almost always find such a game in their game logs. In fact, Matt Leinart's and Vince Young's first seasons are all but a carbon copy of Allen's. Player Cmp Att Cmp% Yds TD Rate Lng Int Sk Yds Y/A AY/A NY/A ANY/A Vince Young 184 357 51.5 2199 12 66.7 53 13 25 129 6.2 5.19 5.42 4.52 Matt Leinart 214 377 56.8 2547 11 74 58 12 21 158 6.8 5.91 6 5.2 Josh Allen 169 320 52.8 2074 10 67.9 75 12 28 213 6.5 5.42 5.35 4.37 Young's rushing was almost identical to Allen's as well. At some point some consistency has to factor into this nebulous "improvement." Leinart was more consistent with 7 of 12 games with ratings of 76 or better while Allen had 8 of 12 games with ratings of less than 72. Young and Allen were almost exact matches. Young threw a TD pass in 9 of 15 games, Leinart in 8 of 12, Allen in 7 of 12. It's something to consider, but just because everyone says that Allen improved after he came back from injury, while perhaps true, does not mean that overall he played well, he didn't. It comes down to how much faith one has that the Miami game was more of a "coming out" than an anomaly.

Not sure that's accurate. We were good in some areas and not so good in others. Everyone seems to default to yardage D despite the fact that game outcomes aren't measured in yards, they're measured in points. We ranked 18th in scoring D. 30th in Red Zone D. We ranked 14th in TDs allowed, very average. Our pass-rush was problematic although our pass-D was pretty good in most indicators otherwise. Kyle, Lorax, and Hughes, three players that predate McBeane were responsible for about half of them. Kyle's no longer here, Lorax is old, and even Hughes is into his back-9. We ranked 20th in plays/point-scored, meaning that we were 20th in terms of how many plays it took on average fro opponents to score. Those things don't really align with a 2nd yardage D ranking. They have to be reconciled. Again, there were some good indicators, primarily in the pass D department where McD specializes and where most of our resources have gone to, certainly the better performing draft picks and free agents. None of that has to do with "our defense being on the field more often than other teams," to the contrary in fact. We had the 5th fewest plays run against us. Our time-of-possession was above average. Either way, there were a number of areas where we regressed, points against stayed exactly the same in ranking, 18th, despite allowing 15 more points last year, a point/game.

What are the odds of that happening tho? I'd put them firmly at slim-to-nil. If Allen busts as such, I see the offense being ranked around 30th again, I don't see it looking better. If all works out, Oliver essentially replaces Kyle, again, a tall order, but that would still put us where we were last season on D. On the other hand, Barkely did post our best game last season as a QB. Extrapolated over an entire season it would be 24 TDs, 0 INTs, 9.3 YPA, 10.7 AYPA, 117.4 Rating, 16 sacks, and average yardage production. Just sayin'.

They're joined at the hip if you ask me, joined at the hip with Allen too. The three of them will sink or swim together.

A little bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy there. If Allen makes the requisite strides we'll be fine. If he doesn't, I have no idea how this offense is going to budge much, if at all, from it's bottom-dwelling ranking which will set the tone for everything else. I don't think wins have as much to do with it other than if we hit 9+ again, for the simple reason that the schedule, on paper right now anyway, is among the easiest in the league. A lot depends upon the Pegulas who seem to manage more by their personal likes than anything else much less any sort of analytical approach or methodology. The Patriots have the second easiest SoS, which means that after the Pats ours is even easier since we play Tennessee and Denver while they have to play KC and Houston. I also wouldn't say "if Allen regresses," there's really not a whole lot of room for him to regress. I would say that he'll have to make a pretty good sized leap in performance. He'll have to easily double his TD production to get into the average range there, and he'll have to halve his TOs for the same reason. It's possible, we'll see. But if he's going to be our franchise QB, anything less than average QB passing production this season will not indicate any trend in that direction, if anything the opposite. Which BTW, is why I would have drafted Hilliard too this season instead of Oliver. I'd have put as much OL talent around him as possible. They chose another route. We'll see if it works.

Well, that is pretty much what the Bills have been doing since Marv Levy left, so those fans are spot on. Might actually make sense to hire more competent people to begin with. Jauron had known issues prior to his hire that were ignored. I pointed them out at the time. Gailey hadn't coached in the NFL what, nearly a decade, and during a rapidly changing NFL at that time, and also had known issues. Marrone had absolutely no significant NFL experience. The whole Ryan things was just weird, almost everyone bought into that. I know I did, foolishly. Some people here staunchly and wisely spoke out about Ryan tho, but they were in a sizeable minority. You reap what you sew and get what you pay for. We can't afford another $5M/season for a real coach or GM, but we waste tons of money on players that never perform because we don't want to pay extra for a proven GM or Coach. Again, Beane had absolutely no experience in this role and was clearly just hired because he could get along with the first-hired HC from the same team. The team really had little choice at that point, they'd penned themselves in. McD hasn't proven that he's an above-average DC and he's certainly not proven that he's even an average HC. Unless he budges that offense from 30th ranked scoring well into the average range this season, seriously, what's he proven. Nothing. If Allen doesn't make enormous strides, I don't think there's going to be much hope much less confidence that next year will be the year. At that point under such circumstances the Pegulas would simply be awaiting the inevitable, which seems to be a staple in Buffalo.

To be real here, neither had any particular credentials before they were hired. Beane was entirely raw and McD's scoring defense at Carolina ranked squarely average during his tenure with it being ranked 26th in his last season there along with his second-worst yardage D ranking too at 21st. He was all over the map from season to season with absolutely no consistency whatsoever in that regard. As a DC in Philly his scoring D ranked 20th. They were hardly the best hires to begin with and Beane was only brought on because he too came from Carolina in a bass-ackwards approach to hiring a GM & HC. They've produced nothing above-average here either and offensively they've taken us to the bottom of the league. Granted, Allen's pending as Oliver, but if they can't push us to above-average this season, I'm simply not seeing anything much less any kind of trend or pattern that even remotely suggests that they'll get there other than by luck in a single-season basis. At some point if you're on the right track then above-average is expected. If we're happy with average or below-average then that's on us. As to Beane, of his day 1 & 2 draft picks none have proven to be premier players. I like Edmunds chances, but both White and Dawkins have been inconsistent. Phillips and Jones don't even approach being premier/impact. This year's days 1 & 2 are still out with Oliver, Knox, Singletary, and Ford. But if they end up being like our other two drafts, how can Beane's competency for this role not be called into question.

Under McD the offense has skidded to the 30th ranked scoring offense. It was 22nd his first season. His average scoring offense is therefore 26th. Ryan's average scoring O was 11th, Marrone's 20th, and Gailey's 21st. We have to go back to Jauron ('06-'09) to get to 26th. Defensively the scoring D has not improved on his watch where it's sat at 18th. Marrone inherited Gailey's 26th average ranked scoring D, made it 20th the following season, then 4th. Obviously Gailey wasn't known for his defensive coaching prowess. Both of McD's units have slide from when he inherited the team. The issues are known, but he's also now had three seasons to at least put something competitive on the field. Given those rankings I'd say that we've been lucky to have won 15 games on his watch so far. One would think that he has to show very significant improvement in the offense this season in terms of being able to score. Obviously any such improvement will come via improvements in Allen's play. The team scored an average 389 points under Ryan with a QB that will likely never again have a starting job. McD's offense has averaged 285 points, over 100 fewer. The D has been about the same in that way. One would think that the defense would have to improve too. Seriously though, if the defense still doesn't rank above average and the O continues to linger in the bottom quartile, I'm not sure how he survives given no significant trend towards improvement. At some point there has to be a leap in effectiveness of at least one of the units, particularly the offense. I would probably ask a related question in a different way. If now in his third season, will McD (and Beane by inference) start taking significant heat if he cannot produce above-average units. With the exception of Edmunds and the secondary, it's not as if they've brought in any players to improve the offense or the DL, or even the OLB spots. With Allen and Oliver pending, along with their current and former free-agents, I mean seriously, if none or only a few of them all step-up then I'm not seeing why that means that these guys know what they're doing. If they can't produce O and D units that were better than they were when they got here, after three seasons, then I'm not sure they're right for the job. What, they need a decade to demonstrate improvement?

And that post and the one that spawned it are not? Roger Hence my strategy. Absolutely no one can make a reasonable argument that the offense would have been any worse had we kept Taylor for one more season.

Don't be so cynical. I'm ALWAYS interested in independent draft analysis. The mainstream stuff bores me to tears. It's ALWAYS nice to see some takes that no one else has offered. Interestingly, and you should be able to find something here, but from that 2016 draft Goff was the only QB that I thought would turn franchise. I liked Prescott and thought that he might blossom, but definitely had him as the 2nd QB I'd have taken. I had Wentz for a bust, that didn't happen. I didn't have much of an opinion on the 2017 Draft as QBs went tho. Oddly. Either way, when discussing some of this, I was entirely on an island in my takes about Spiller and Watkins. I'm quite content with the results of my own assessments, as limited as they are and typically pertaining to our team, I fully realize that often they're not popular (aka when I don't agree with the picks essentially), but at the end of the day I'd go toe-to-toe with anyone in the business.

Under McD the offense has skidded to the 30th ranked scoring offense. It was 22nd his first season. His average scoring offense is therefore 26th. Ryan's average scoring O was 11th, Marrone's 20th, and Gailey's 21st. We have to go back to Jauron ('06-'09) to get to 26th. Defensively the scoring D has not improved on his watch where it's sat at 18th. Marrone inherited Gailey's 26th average ranked scoring D, made it 20th the following season, then 4th. Obviously Gailey wasn't known for his defensive coaching prowess. Both of McD's units have slide from when he inherited the team. The issues are known, but he's also now had three seasons to at least put something competitive on the field. Given those rankings I'd say that we've been lucky to have won 15 games on his watch so far. One would think that he has to show very significant improvement in the offense this season in terms of being able to score. Obviously any such improvement will come via improvements in Allen's play. The team scored an average 389 points under Ryan with a QB that will likely never again have a starting job. McD's offense has averaged 285 points, over 100 fewer. The D has been about the same in that way. The last time that the O scored as few points as we did last season was Jauron's last year and his D held opponents to 48 fewer points (3 ppg) than McD. Jauron was fired at that point. So in short, if McD's O doesn't make a pretty good sized stride, and his D doesn't improve, his team after three seasons will be worse than Jauron's was in his last season. I fail to see how that could possibly be acceptable under any circumstances. One would think that the defense would have to improve too. Seriously though, if the defense still doesn't rank above average and the O continues to linger in the bottom quartile, I'm not sure how he survives given no significant trend towards improvement. At some point there has to be a leap in effectiveness of at least one of the units, particularly the offense.

Am I mistaken, I just took a peek, unless I'm missing something that thread ends with the last post being before that Draft even happened. I don't care about your takes on a variety of undrafted players, specifically I'm only interested in the players we drafted in rounds 1-3, days 1 & 2. Check me if I'm wrong. As well, don't take this wrong, but I also don't have time to scour 24 pages for two or three of your posts. There used to be a way, perhaps a long time ago, where one could search someone else's post by date. I always look for draft stuff within the first two or three days after a draft. When I searched on yours it only went back about three months. Am I not doing something right in searching? Is there another way to find dated posts by someone?

I didn't say that I did know your methods. Again, my comments are generally meant. As well, I've not seen yours, that's why I say that "I've not seen ..." I'd love to read 'em. I'd even love to discuss, but forums are toxic for group noise and mob-mentality. You have to admit however, that just about everything you read about draft picks is little more than parroted-back stuff that's out there in the mainstream. That's fine, and noted. But the majority of people here do take issue with them. And truly, I give a crap about being right. I simply call it as I see it. But people LOVE to cite the so-called "experts" which I've pointed out many times in the past had their heads so far up their tailpipes that it's amazing that they're still regarded as "experts." And around here, it's funny how some are experts when their opinions align with the mob/pop mentality, yet despite being correct way more often than not, when their opinions don't align then they're morons. I won't mention any names, it's pointless. I also don't expect you to agree with me. Few ever do when I'm as critical as I am re: Allen & Oliver. Again, absolutely no one agreed with me on Spiller or Watkins, no one, anywhere, nationally, regional, here, anywhere. So I fully expect that. What I don't appreciate is being spoken down to as if I'm some kind of ######, particularly given my track record and being lectured as if my methods haven't worked in the past or assumptions that my track record is abysmal when it's the polar opposite. That's fine, but please, for the people doing it don't expect me to engage them on anything even approaching a regular basis. Since most of them cannot control themselves as such, I take it upon myself to put them on ignore, then they get angry and throw out other challenges that I can't see etc. I mean honestly, talk about being OCD. You and I get into heated exchanges, but you don't do that. I enjoy the back-n-forth generally speaking. Also, keep in mind, that I may respond to you, but in the meantime I may reply to someone else where the context isn't quite the same, but in the same thread those replies can easily be erroneously merged such that misunderstandings arise, which is why I prefer to weed out much of that "noise" and which is why I much prefer independent discussion via PMs or e-mails or whatever. Unfortunately most people prefer the glass house and mob scene that is the forum, so if you want to discuss there isn't much choice. Strangely, most of the people I've engaged with in the past in that way simply don't care anymore. When I call them to talk they don't even really know what's going on with the team anymore, they've dropped off and are in "show me" mode. I am too but I love analysis. I've really gotta run and get some biz stuff done, but I'm eager to read from that link. I'll get back to you. Perhaps PM if you don't mind.

Again, I respond to posters. Try asking them. Complicated concept? And again, funny, if I don't respond then I'm "shying away from having to take on the 'tough challenges'" as has even recently been cited. You really can't make this stuff up. It's pretty funny too, threads typically go off the rails on topic fairly soon on a regular basis. Funny that you cite me for actually trying to talk about the team when those threads quite often go off the rails in violations of the ToS and laden with little more than personal insult exchanges and the like. I try to avoid those. Now, unless you have something about the team to discuss ... OK, so you're saying that I should avoid people commenting directly to me then? Noted. One vote for that. Funny tho, here today recently I've been charged with not doing that. I guess sometimes you just can't win, huh.

I never said anything about you personally being ignorant, please don't put words in my mouth. I try my best to keep personal insults out of the mix of what I prefer to be civil conversation. If something I said was construed as such, I apologize. Often times I generalize and it's taken personally. Imagine that in a forum. LOL Otherwise, as with you, I may point out that a method, analysis, or something said was not wise, is foolish, etc., but again, I do my damdest to ensure that I don't violate the ToS. I did search, it didn't go back that far. Same here, search on mine. Many of mine from former days were online in numerous places. LOL on the kids.

I'm stupid and ignorant, remember. Send me the links to your Spiller, Watkins, Zay Jones, Lawson, and Ragland draft reviews.

Here's an idea, talk to the people that keep asking me questions and commenting on the topics that you don't want to read. ... then ironically start in with the personal attacks and slam me if I don't respond to them for whatever reason. Make sense? Really, does it make sense? If not, not sure what to tell you. But wait, here's another novel idea since you're tired of reading my stuff, put me on ignore. There are a lot of them here. Really. I'll be quite content. I don't have much patience for people that complain about things that they have it 100% within their control to change. So ....? Really, it's easy. Go to your control panel, click on "Ignored Users," and put my name in there. Take you maybe 20 seconds if you're slow.

LOL Really? Otherwise, I'm pretty sure that whatever he's asked has already been answered elsewhere. I don't take part in petty discussions where posters render their personal opinions of me or my personality devoid of anything critical to discuss. If you don't like it, too bad.